Hooknswoop 19 #376 July 8, 2016 QuoteInteresting perspective regarding what? Guns. Derek V Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #377 July 8, 2016 HooknswoopQuoteInteresting perspective regarding what? Guns. Derek V there are several million articles out there - what does this one address? What point of view are they describing? What is their argument?I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hooknswoop 19 #378 July 8, 2016 Quotethere are several million articles out there - what does this one address? What point of view are they describing? What is their argument? Yep. Derek V Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Boomerdog 0 #379 July 8, 2016 QuoteAre you implying an armed populace would only keep the federal government under control, but would have no effect on municipal governments? Here's something to chew on. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Athens_(1946) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #380 July 8, 2016 QuoteSo in your mind, will issues around police overreach get better or worse if the LEOs are the only ones with guns? It is better in many other civilized countries with stricter gun laws. It is worse in many countries with high gun ownership. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,106 #381 July 11, 2016 States with most gun deaths (per capita). www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/06/13/24-7-wall-st-states-most-gun-violence/71003050/... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Coreeece 2 #382 July 12, 2016 kallendStates with most gun deaths (per capita). www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/06/13/24-7-wall-st-states-most-gun-violence/71003050/ That gives a pretty nice concise list of the details. I highlighted the important parts below: 1. Louisiana Louisiana residents also struggle with high poverty rates and poor educational attainment. Nearly one in five people in the state lived below the poverty line in 2012, the third highest rate nationally. 2. Mississippi Like many of the states with the most gun deaths, state residents frequently struggle with poverty. Mississippi led the nation with a poverty rate of 24.2% in 2012, and it trailed behind most states in other factors such as access to basic necessities, health care, and household income. 3. Alaska Most of these fatalities, however, were not homicides. The gun-related homicide rate was exceptionally low in Alaska... ...Socioeconomically, Alaska was an exception. 4. Wyoming Wyoming reported just 96 firearms deaths, among the fewest of any state in the U.S. However, Wyoming is also the nation’s least populous state, with just over 567,000 residents. 5. Oklahoma Like the majority of the states with high gun-related fatality rates, Oklahoma residents are also relatively poor. 6. Montana Montana’s high suicide rate may be due in part to extremely low population density. According to the American Psychological Association, suicide rates tend to be higher in rural areas for a variety of factors, including “greater access to firearms, high rates of drug and alcohol use and few health-care providers and emergency medical facilities.” 7. Arkansas Arkansas also shares an exceptionally high poverty rate with the majority of states with high numbers of gun deaths. Nearly 20% of residents lived below the poverty line 8. Alabama Like a majority of states with the most gun violence, Alabama struggles with high poverty. In 2012, 19% of residents lived below the poverty line 9. New Mexico Poor socioeconomic conditions may partly explain the higher crime rates. More than one in five New Mexico residents lived in poverty 10. South Carolina Poverty rate: 18.3% (9th highest) Given that the list was compiled from CDC data, I'm not surprised to see that poverty seems to be the common theme here with the exception of Alaska, Montana and Wyoming. Those states made the cut primarily because of their lower populations and suicide that tends to be more prevalent in suburban/rural areas vs urban homicide in more poverty stricken areas.Never was there an answer....not without listening, without seeing - Gilmour Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Coreeece 2 #383 July 13, 2016 kallendStates with most gun deaths (per capita). www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/06/13/24-7-wall-st-states-most-gun-violence/71003050/ There were a couple other things that I wanted to "discuss" but I left them out so the point in my previous post wouldn't be overshadowed. The Bias of the Article Again, I think the actual list was objective and well written. It's interesting how the writers of 247wallst had no problem writing their own comments as long as they were supported by CDC data, however when publishing opinions that weren't supported by the CDC, they turned to some guy from one of the most bias think tanks in the country to add a liberal spin and attack conservatives and red states with less stringent gun laws - as if that's the real problem. Misleading State Crime Rates Obviously, understanding crime rates helps us to determine the problem, identify problematic areas and address the issue - however, I think comparing state rates is somewhat pointless and detracts from the real issues behind gun violence since it's not spread evenly throughout the state. It's much more practical to compare cities. For example, let's take New Mexico and Colorado. The majority of gun homicides in those states are in Albuquerque and Denver. Both have similar demographics, populations and gun homicide rates, but because New Mexico has half the population of Colorado, these stats are amplified and place it on some top 10 list giving the impression that NM is way more dangerous than CO - which isn't true. If you're in New Mexico outside of Albuquerque, you're probably just as safe as if you were outside of Denver - likewise, there is about the same amount of risk if you were inside either of those cities. Now - if we take a closer look at the numbers, we can see that Albuquerque has a slightly lower population with a slightly higher rate of gun related homicides than Denver. Given CDC data, we can say that this is probably attributed to a slightly higher poverty rate in Albuquerque along with a lower ratio of police per 10,000 people. You wouldn't be able to determine that if you were looking at this on a state level, which is why I think people like you are still hellbent on meaningless gun controls laws to fix the problem even tho the CDC has already stated that there is no evidence to suggest that they will.Never was there an answer....not without listening, without seeing - Gilmour Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hooknswoop 19 #384 July 20, 2016 QuoteI would challenge you to equate shooting 100 people vs. shooting them with a case of beer. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Nice_attack Or running them over with a truck? Further gun control laws are not going to be effective. The assault weapon ban demonstrated this. The background check and magazine limit laws here in CO demonstrate this. A law's effectiveness is based on many factors; Is it highly enforced or not enforced? High penalty for getting caught, or minimal penalty? What is the reward if you get away with breaking the law? Bill Von said that drunk driving decreased dramatically from education, enforcement, and stiff penalties. High chance of getting caught. Stiff penalty for when you do get caught. That would really offset a lot of the potential reward side of the column. Throw in some education..... Why not apply the same recipe to guns? Wouldn't it work there as well? Law abiding gun owners are not affected and rates of gun-related homicides go down. Win-Win. Derek V Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #385 July 20, 2016 HooknswoopQuoteI would challenge you to equate shooting 100 people vs. shooting them with a case of beer. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Nice_attack Or running them over with a truck? Further gun control laws are not going to be effective. The assault weapon ban demonstrated this. The background check and magazine limit laws here in CO demonstrate this. A law's effectiveness is based on many factors; Is it highly enforced or not enforced? High penalty for getting caught, or minimal penalty? What is the reward if you get away with breaking the law? Bill Von said that drunk driving decreased dramatically from education, enforcement, and stiff penalties. High chance of getting caught. Stiff penalty for when you do get caught. That would really offset a lot of the potential reward side of the column. Throw in some education..... Why not apply the same recipe to guns? Wouldn't it work there as well? Law abiding gun owners are not affected and rates of gun-related homicides go down. Win-Win. Derek V Sounds to me like the age old argument that the death penalty doesn't deer crime - while in other cases - high penalties do - strange that . . . That a high penalty works for some common and often omitted crime, but not for others is interesting.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,072 #386 July 20, 2016 >Sounds to me like the age old argument that the death penalty doesn't deer crime - while in other >cases - high penalties do - strange that . . . Not so strange. Many criminals fear life in prison as much as, if not more than, execution. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,106 #387 July 20, 2016 turtlespeed***QuoteI would challenge you to equate shooting 100 people vs. shooting them with a case of beer. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Nice_attack Or running them over with a truck? Further gun control laws are not going to be effective. The assault weapon ban demonstrated this. The background check and magazine limit laws here in CO demonstrate this. A law's effectiveness is based on many factors; Is it highly enforced or not enforced? High penalty for getting caught, or minimal penalty? What is the reward if you get away with breaking the law? Bill Von said that drunk driving decreased dramatically from education, enforcement, and stiff penalties. High chance of getting caught. Stiff penalty for when you do get caught. That would really offset a lot of the potential reward side of the column. Throw in some education..... Why not apply the same recipe to guns? Wouldn't it work there as well? Law abiding gun owners are not affected and rates of gun-related homicides go down. Win-Win. Derek V Sounds to me like the age old argument that the death penalty doesn't deer crime - while in other cases - high penalties do - strange that . . . That a high penalty works for some common and often omitted crime, but not for others is interesting. Data show that the argument is correct, whether or not you think it strange. Trumpiness (TM) is believing what you feel to be true despite no factual basis for the belief, and not caring.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nolhtairt 0 #388 July 21, 2016 billvon>Sounds to me like the age old argument that the death penalty doesn't deer crime - while in other >cases - high penalties do - strange that . . . Not so strange. Many criminals fear life in prison as much as, if not more than, execution. Yet they'll still spend as much as 25 to 30 years on death row before finally getting executed. Some die before its carried out. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 851 #389 July 21, 2016 While some still have been executed while innocent. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #390 July 21, 2016 normissWhile some still have been executed while innocent. And many more went unpunished that should have been. It's not a perfect system.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,537 #391 July 21, 2016 By saying "innocent until proven guilty" we are declaring that is the better outcome, to let a guilty person go than to incarcerate, and even more, execute, an innocent one. It's part of our rulebook. Wendy P.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #392 July 21, 2016 wmw999By saying "innocent until proven guilty" we are declaring that is the better outcome, to let a guilty person go than to incarcerate, and even more, execute, an innocent one. It's part of our rulebook. Wendy P. Wendy How many innocents, that you say have been executed, can YOU name? And who's rule book are you speaking of?"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #393 July 21, 2016 wmw999By saying "innocent until proven guilty" we are declaring that is the better outcome, to let a guilty person go than to incarcerate, and even more, execute, an innocent one. It's part of our rulebook. Wendy P. I agree with the premise - just not really the outcome. BUT . . . One simply can't have it both ways.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,106 #394 July 21, 2016 wmw999By saying "innocent until proven guilty" we are declaring that is the better outcome, to let a guilty person go than to incarcerate, and even more, execute, an innocent one. It's part of our rulebook. Wendy P. Should Hillary Clinton be summarily executed? Or merely imprisoned without trial? These are the two options coming from Cleveland this week.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #395 July 21, 2016 kallend***By saying "innocent until proven guilty" we are declaring that is the better outcome, to let a guilty person go than to incarcerate, and even more, execute, an innocent one. It's part of our rulebook. Wendy P. Should Hillary Clinton be summarily executed? Or merely imprisoned without trial? These are the two options coming from Cleveland this week. No - but she should stop buying her accusers.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
